Although the applied science processes of both CPU manufacturers are different plenty that direct comparisons are of limited utility, we can still glean some information from them. The AMD CPU has higher enshroud and core count, typically needed for the better workstation performance in which AMD dominates, merely Intel has greater Boost Clock speeds for both single-core and all-core, unremarkably the areas one looks for in a gaming-focused CPU. The process size of each CPU differs as well, Intel’s offer however based on the older 14nm format, whereas AMD’s processors are on 7nm. Broadly speaking the lower the process size the more transistors can be fit onto the CPU, and the more powerful the performance that tin can exist engineered out of the aforementioned size chip, given differing manufacturing techniques all the same, this is not necessarily e’er the case.
The final thing to note of course is the price difference. In a departure from previous years, AMD are charging a $50 higher toll than Intel for their rival processor, a premium price that speaks as to the confidence they accept in their production outperforming.
As mentioned, workstation performance is an area in which AMD have dominated over the last few years, their superior multi-cadre and enshroud performance being the deciding factor over Intel, whose processors historically have had the edge when it comes to single-clock speed and overclocking. As yous would wait, the 5900X outperforms the Intel i9-10900K in the expanse of workstation utilise substantially.
As mentioned, workstation functioning is an area in which AMD have dominated over the last few years, their superior multi-core and cache performance being the deciding factor over Intel, whose processors historically accept had the border when it comes to single-clock speed and overclocking. As you would expect, the 5900X outperforms the Intel i9-10900K in the area of workstation apply substantially.
Unlike the $250 more than expensive
, which is targeted towards creatives and professionals that want a desktop PC that can perform workstation tasks besides as game; the 5900X, and its 3900X predecessor, are aimed primarily at enthusiast-level gamers only. This is not to say that you won’t be able to go some multi-cadre productivity out of the CPU in these tasks, however. As the benchmarking above shows, the rendering speed and multicore functioning for the new 5900X still competes very favorably. Surprisingly the 5900X even outperforms the older 3950X, previously the industry favorite for small-scale to medium-sized creative professionals and hobbyists, in certain areas of workstation utilise; overall though the 3950X nevertheless has the edge equally you would look from its greater number of cores and threads.
If you are looking to build a proper workstation rig, then we would recommend looking at the sixteen-core
or alternatively, if you are constrained by a tight budget, consider a second paw
Exceptions to this would be if you are merely interested in performance on software similar Adobe Photoshop, which is mostly reliant on single-core speed than multi-core usage. For the vast majority of other editing and visual furnishings software, as well every bit streaming usage, the 5950X is your all-time bet. All the same, when comparing the 5900X vs Intel’due south i9-10900K for workstation use, the 5900X definitely comes out on summit.
Single clock speed is still the predominant factor when it comes to gaming (and also for a handful of workstation tasks such as using Adobe Photoshop) and this has been the area in which Intel has dominated historically. Whilst newer games are beginning to apply multi-processor power, for the adjacent couple of years at to the lowest degree, single-core operation is yet the main focus.
Equally mentioned, the 5900X has lower clock speeds than the i9-10900K. Although the Base clock of both is 3.7Ghz, in practice Base Clock merely represents a theoretical idling frequency, most CPUs rarely drib to this level, certainly non in gaming. In terms of single-core Boost clock the Intel processor comes in 0.5Ghz higher than the 5900X, withal, the clock speed is only role of the story with operation. The improvements in compages for AMD’southward Zen 3 CPUs have brought substantial Instructions Per Clock (IPC) uplift, so the overall number of instructions the 5900X is capable of over any given time is really slightly higher than the i9-10900K, fifty-fifty with the lower clock speeds.
Bodily FPS operation of course differs from game-to-game, and then let’due south look at some benchmarks beneath to come across how the two processors stack up.
Unmarried clock speed is still the predominant factor when it comes to gaming (and besides for a handful of workstation tasks such equally using Adobe Photoshop) and this has been the area in which Intel has dominated historically. Whilst newer games are showtime to utilize multi-processor power, for the next couple of years at to the lowest degree, unmarried-core performance is still the primary focus.
As mentioned, the 5900X has lower clock speeds than the i9-10900K. Although the Base clock of both is three.7Ghz, in do Base Clock only represents a theoretical idling frequency, most CPUs rarely driblet to this level, certainly not in gaming. In terms of single-core Boost clock the Intel processor comes in 0.5Ghz higher than the 5900X, all the same, the clock speed is simply office of the story with performance. The improvements in architecture for AMD’south Zen 3 CPUs accept brought substantial Instructions Per Clock (IPC) uplift, so the overall number of instructions the 5900X is capable of over any given time is actually slightly higher than the i9-10900K, even with the lower clock speeds.
Actual FPS operation of course differs from game-to-game, so permit’due south look at some benchmarks below to see how the 2 processors stack upward.
Although the Microsoft Flight Sim results are only slightly better than the i9-10900K, on Shadow Of The Tomb Raider we have seen an average FPS uplift of 10%, with a 26% comeback for Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. Other benchmarks will possibly show variation in FPS results, but based on these figures it seems to us like the 5900X represents great value. This is especially true if yous are considering purchasing a new Radeon 6000 series graphics card, as nosotros will become over below.
The concluding thing to think nearly when weighing up whether to pick the 5900X or i9-10900K (if the to a higher place was not already sufficient) is whether or not you lot are intending to buy one of the new Radeon 6000 serial graphics cards from AMD. Every bit we explain in greater depth hither, the Smart Admission Memory (SAM) characteristic allows 5000 series Ryzen CPUs to gain additional performance through more than efficient usage of GPU memory, ranging from between 2% – xiii% additional FPS operation on the games AMD showed us. After the new Radeon 6000 series graphics cards are released so we will accept a better idea of how realistic this is, but so far AMD’s figures accept been authentic once independently tested.
Whilst yous could argue that the Intel i9-10900K was the but CPU that could get the virtually out of the highest finish Nvidia cards (e.g. the RTX 3090) until recently, in that location hasn’t actually been much benefit in pairing particular manufacturers CPUs with GPUs in the past. AMD’s push towards synergizing their CPUs and GPUs at present gives potential customers an incentive to buy both components from the red team.
The benchmarks speak for themselves when it comes to comparing the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X with the Intel i9-10900K. AMD actually take accomplished something very impressive with the operation they’ve managed to squeeze out of the same 7nm process and it seems Intel, however on 14nm for at present at to the lowest degree, is lagging behind them. Overall the 5900X outcompetes the i9-10900K in both gaming and workstation use, although on some games this difference seems to be slight, on others, information technology is very substantial. Although the Intel i9-10900K is $50 cheaper it is hard to find a reason to recommend buying one over the 5900X unless its price drops significantly on the second-hand market.
This is particularly the instance when you consider that the FPS gains between the 5900X and the Intel i9-10900K shown in the higher up benchmark charts do not fifty-fifty factor in Smart Access Retentiveness, which has yet to be tested. If you lot are planning on buying a 6000 series Radeon graphics card anyhow, SAM is essentially additional free operation, and you really would be missing out if you paired a Radeon GPU with a new Intel processor.
If y’all already ain an i9-10900K so the deviation in FPS uplift, impressive every bit it is on sure games, might not be worth buying the 5900X unless y’all tin get a skillful resale price for your existing i9-10900K on the 2d-paw market place. If you can go a proficient price yet and are looking to option up a Radeon 6000 card, then going red team for the CPU as well would make a powerful automobile indeed.
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X